New York’s next mayor will be decided not by ideology but by ego — and we are the prisoners of their stubbornness (“Ackman weighs in on New York mayoral race”, Report, October 17).
Andrew Cuomo and Curtis Sliwa are trapped in a classic prisoner’s dilemma. Each believes that staying in the race serves his self-interest, but this combined obstinacy produces a collectively worse outcome, ie a Zohran Mamdani victory with a weak plurality. Both would be better off if one dropped out, but neither wants to blink first.
But unlike the textbook “dilemma”, these prisoners can talk. They could negotiate: Cuomo could offer Sliwa real influence for an endorsement, or vice versa. The rational solution exists — but their egos won’t allow them to find it. The stakes are clear. Mamdani stands at just 45.7 per cent, according to RealClearPolitics. Even with 73 per cent in 2013, Bill de Blasio struggled to influence Albany, the New York State capital. A 33-year-old assemblyman with no executive record will have even less leverage with Albany and Washington — especially after winning with less than half the city’s support and alienating moderates, business leaders, and much of his own party.
The rational move: whoever polls lower in the run-up to the November 4 vote steps aside. But each believes the other should withdraw. So neither budges, both lose, and New York gets a mayor without the political capital to govern. We can all see it coming, but we’re locked in their cell, prisoners of their egos, waiting for a disaster both preventable and inevitable.
Todd Pittinsky
Port Jefferson, NY, US